Cupra Vs Polo GTi

[Wings988]

They both use the same 180ps engine and DSG 'box AFAIK I would have thought the performance would be the same. However the Polo is quoted at 6.9s to 60 against 7.2s for the Cupra. There doesn't appear to be a significant weight difference. The polo is also quoted with better fuel economy. Does anyone know why this is?

In reality is the Polo any faster and how come they quote a faster 0-60 time?

Cheers

 

[Ianmr]

I have no idea but I wish I had bought the Polo over the Cupra, love the Polo GTI lol

Thinking about trading but it's just a waste of money.

 

[jc_boc]

Sorry but the ibiza looks miles better than the polo. The polo gti looks like any other polo to me whereas the ibiza cupra/boca can easily be distinguished from the other ibiza models.

 

[J400uk]

Polo is more aerodynamic maybe? Or could be gearing/ecu differences. It's definetely the better car of the two though, just rather expensive...

 

[Sinan]

GTI is more expensive in UK? Strange, Boc costs around £21260, Polo GTI is £16670 !! Plus, Boc is more expensive than a cupra about £500 here?

 

[vRSy]

gearing is the same, engine is the same, everythin else is the shame.

The difference will be weight, but the BIGGEST difference is how they test the cars and market the performance etc.

As for the Cupra standing out from the rest of the Ibiza range i disagree, i think both the GTI and Cupra look just like the rest of the range until you see the badge on the back. I will admit the Bocanegra stands out a fair bit more.

The Polo has a much better interior than the ibiza though.

For me i wouldnt pay the price for the cupra or the Polo GTI tbh, i think its a rip off. The only reason i bought my Fabia was because i got it for just over 13k which made it a bargain, i wouldnt pay full price for it, i know that.

 

[Wings988]

it's not the weight. Polo is 1269kg Cupra 1259kg

Must be down to the way they were tested.

I agree the Polo dashboard does look nicer but the Polo is not as well equipped as the Cupra or even FR and costs more. Seems alot to pay extra for a VW badge.

Do they suffer the same engine problems with the GTi and Fabia VRS?

 

[vRSy]

it's not the weight. Polo is 1269kg Cupra 1259kg

Must be down to the way they were tested.

I agree the Polo dashboard does look nicer but the Polo is not as well equipped as the Cupra or even FR and costs more. Seems alot to pay extra for a VW badge.

Do they suffer the same engine problems with the GTi and Fabia VRS?

yes and no. The Cupra has been out the longest,hence the older engines have loads of issues, which have been rectified or improved upon over time.

So the Fabia vRS and Polo GTI which are newer in comparison have less of the issues. Same goes for the more recent cupras, they 'should' also be less prone to problems.

You mention the weights. It depends how they quote the weight. How much fuel, any passengers etc, then its how much fuel they used for testing etc, the weather at the time etc

 

[G.P]

I have no idea but I wish I had bought the Polo over the Cupra, love the Polo GTI lol

Thinking about trading but it's just a waste of money.

Yes, wish I could have got a polo v Ibiza, but the driving position/seat just made it impossible. . .

 

[NetworkMan]

The German equivalent of the AA, ADAC, tested both cars within a month of one another. They rated them more or less equal with both scoring 2.1.

It's www.adac.de if you're interested and can find your way through the German.

BTW British Motoring Which? use ADAC's reviews for their car tests, they don't do them themselves!

 

[Jay1990]

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/833/testaudia1vstestvrek.jpg/

This I think is the best comparison of models Ive seen, from these figures, Im led to belive that the Polo runs on 185ps, and Im sure I read that somwhere else also, with it being more recent as said above the engines have been altered slightly so will run better than figures quoted 3 years ago.

Jay

 

[Wings988]

yes and no. The Cupra has been out the longest,hence the older engines have loads of issues, which have been rectified or improved upon over time.

So the Fabia vRS and Polo GTI which are newer in comparison have less of the issues. Same goes for the more recent cupras, they 'should' also be less prone to problems.

You mention the weights. It depends how they quote the weight. How much fuel, any passengers etc, then its how much fuel they used for testing etc, the weather at the time etc

Both cars weight is quoted in line with EU directive 95/48, which includes 90% full fuel tank, driver at 68kg and 7kg luggage.

When were the engines improved? (how new a cupra is needed to get a better one?)
The reason I ask is my Brother is impressed with my FR and wants to get a Cupra so obviously he would want to get the more reliable version. He's been looking at 60 reg models, are these likely to be good?

 

[vRSy]

The engine maps, injectors, piston rings, spark plugs, and probably even more have changed over the last year all in VWs attempts to get these engines reliable

 

[grant 123]

I have had two professionally timed runs in a stock boc, 6.6 & 6.8 so i wouldnt always trust the figures

 

[Wings988]

The engine maps, injectors, piston rings, spark plugs, and probably even more have changed over the last year all in VWs attempts to get these engines reliable

Thanks for the info. Do you know if they have done a recall or upgrade when in for service to fit the improved parts?
Engine map and spark plugs are an easy job but new rings is obviously a big job and new injectors isn't cheap. How likely are dealers going to fit these under warranty?


I was sure that this twin charger engine was 1st fitted to the Scirocco?

 

[Jay1990]

I was going to post this in my OBD Thread but Today I did some timed 0-60 runs (very accurate as using the cars own info to calculate) This is something Ive posted on my old haunt(ZSOC)

Just been out doing some runs with the obdII and did just two 0-60s off the scanner, esp on 6.7s esp off 6.7 with 3/4 of a tank. And holding at 40 going to 60 in 2.7s . I tried to upload to photobucket but it didnt upload

Cant wait to see figures remapped.

Jay

Edit: Just collected my gf and a weekends luggage( for a women) and did some more 0-60 first with esp was 6.8 next without wad 6.5! not bad for a booked 7.2 or w.e speed. Again i tried photobucking it but only got this... not very helpful...

Boo going to email producer about it see what can be done.

So Ive also done between 6.7 and 6.5s 0-60's

 

[VRSLOZ]

Why is the Polo GTi rated quicker on paper.......



......VW want it to sell more

 

[Nutkin]

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/833/testaudia1vstestvrek.jpg/

This I think is the best comparison of models Ive seen, from these figures, Im led to belive that the Polo runs on 185ps, and Im sure I read that somwhere else also, with it being more recent as said above the engines have been altered slightly so will run better than figures quoted 3 years ago.

Jay

weird cause i've beaten their 1/4 mile time by .1 seconds and beaten their top speed by 7mph.

I tried the polo and even with family discount i could only get one within about 2k of the bocanegra, also the polo has a very bland interior and exterior imo, nice but still looks like any other vw. Whereas i feel the seats are a bit more sperated in looks.

See an ibiza coming and you know its an ibiza, see a polo coming and is it a golf is it a polo maybe a passat in the dark!

 

[The Pielander]

The 0-60 times are odd. I noticed the Audi A1 with the same engine, albeit '180 bhp', and the 7 speed DSG, albeit 'S-tronic', is listed as 6.7s! How does that happen? It is 0.5s faster than the Cupra somehow....

 

[J400uk]

The 0-60 times are odd. I noticed the Audi A1 with the same engine, albeit '180 bhp', and the 7 speed DSG, albeit 'S-tronic', is listed as 6.7s! How does that happen? It is 0.5s faster than the Cupra somehow....

A1 is very slightly more powerful @ 185ps